1. No category

Minutes for I-4 Ultimate Short-List Meeting of May 21, 2013
Attached, for informational purposes only, are the Florida Department of
Transportation’s meeting minutes for the I-4 Ultimate Short-List meeting that took place
on May 21, 2013.
Although the Department properly noticed the Short-List meeting, the meeting
was open to the public, and minutes were taken in compliance with the Sunshine Law, a
request to record the meeting was not accommodated; therefore, the Department will be
holding another Short-List meeting on June 5, 2013 at 10:00 am in order to
accommodate any person who would like to record the meeting.
No effective decision resulted from the May 21, 2013 meeting. At the June 5,
2013 meeting the Project Selection Committee will make all Short-List decisions
regarding the I-4 Ultimate Project.
I-4 Ultimate Project Selection Committee Short-List Meeting
Minutes
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
1:00 pm
FDOT Orlando Urban Office – 133 S Semoran Blvd, Orlando, FL 32807
1. The Short-List Meeting of the Project Selection Committee was called to order by Frank O’Dea at 1:02 pm.
75 people signed in.
2. Frank O’Dea went through a presentation that described the project, the proposer teams and Statement of
Qualifications Evaluation Process, including the steps that the Technical, Financial and Administrative Expert
Panels and Scorers went through to get to the Short-List Meeting.
3. Clarification Points: The Financial Expert Panel made clarifications to their consensus comments for the
4wardPartners and I-4 Mobility Partners teams. The Technical Expert Panel made a clarification to their
consensus comments for the I-4 Ultimate Mobility Partners team. At the meeting revised versions of the
consensus comments, marked to show changes, were provided to the technical and financial scorers for their
review.
The Scorers reviewed the clarified consensus comments, their original score sheets and the portions of the
Statements of Qualifications related to the clarified consensus comments. No Scorer changed their scores or
comments after performing this review.
4. Frank O’Dea continued with the meeting once it was confirmed that no changes were made to the scores after
the clarifications were made.
5. The pass/fail recommendations from the Scorers were given to the Project Selection Committee and posted on
the screen for viewing by those in attendance. The Project Selection Committee reviewed the pass/fail scores
and determined that the Statements of Qualifications of I-4 Mobility Partners failed to meet the requirements of
the Request for Qualifications.
Proposer Teams
4wardPartners
I-4 Development Partners LLC
Ultimate Mobility Partners
I-4 Mobility Partners
I-4 Ultimate Mobility Partners
I-4 Ultimate Expressway Partners
4ward Express ProposerCo, LLC
Technical Pass/fail:
Technical Scoring
Committee
Financial Pass/Fail:
Financial Scoring
Committee
Administrative Pass/Fail:
Administrative Scoring
Committee
Overall
Pass/Fail
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fail*
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fail
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fail
Pass
Pass
* 2 Scorers failed, 1 Scorer passed
6. The weightings for the Financial criteria, Technical criteria and the numerical equivalents for the adjectival
scores were set before the receipt of the Statements of Qualifications and kept in sealed envelopes. After the
pass/fail determination, these sealed envelopes were presented by Noranne Downs to Frank O’Dea who gave
them to Michelle Sloan to be entered into the master score spreadsheet.
P a g e |1
I-4 Ultimate Short-List Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
7. At this point, the Average of Recommended Scores was presented to the Project Selection Committee and
posted on the screen for viewing by those in attendance.
SCORING OVERVIEW
Average of Recommended Scores
Possible Max.
4wardPartners
Score
I-4
Development
Partners LLC
Ultimate
Mobility
Partners
I-4 Mobility
Partners
I-4 Ultimate
Expressway
Partners
4ward Express
ProposerCo,
LLC
66.08
76.39
64.23
63.09
24.20
26.67
6.87
6.80
30.67
26.38
2.50
3.25
Overall Recommended SOQ Score (100 Max. Points)
100.00
71.49
75.26
Component 1: Technical Qualifications and Capability (40 Maximum Points)
40.00
34.33
32.00
36.73
34.73
Component 2: Statement of Technical and Subcontracting Approach (10 Maximum Points)
10.00
8.20
7.93
6.93
5.90
Component 3: Financial Qualifications and Capacity (45 Maximum Points)
45.00
25.54
31.63
20.50
33.29
Component 4: Statement of Financial Approach (5 Maximum Points)
5.00
3.42
3.70
1.92
2.47
The Overall Ranking was also presented to the Project Selection Committee and also was posted on the screen
for viewing by those in attendance.
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
Overall Ranking (Max 100 Points)
Team
I-4 Mobility Partners
I-4 Development Partners LLC
4wardPartners
Ultimate Mobility Partners
I-4 Ultimate Expressway Partners
4ward Express ProposerCo, LLC
Score
76.39
75.26
71.49
66.08
64.23
63.09
The Project Selection Committee (Noranne Downs, Alan Hyman, Gerry O’Reilly) discussed the results from the
scores and asked some of the scorers clarifying questions. The Project Selection Committee then made a
decision to short-list the top four ranked teams.
•
•
•
•
4wardPartners
I-4 Development Partners LLC
I-4 Mobility Partners
Ultimate Mobility Partners
8. Meeting ended by Frank O’Dea at 2:02 pm.
P a g e |2
I-4 Ultimate Short-List Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
I-4 Ultimate Project
Project Selection Committee
Briefing
Briefing Overview
Description of Project
Composition of Proposer Teams
4wardPartners
I-4 Development Partners LLC
Ultimate Mobility Partners
I-4 Mobility Partners
I-4 Ultimate Mobility Partners
I-4 Ultimate Expressway Partners
4ward Express ProposerCo, LLC
Procurement Schedule
Summary of Procurement Process
Presentation of Pass/Fail Recommendations
Financial, Technical & Administrative
Summary of SOQ Recommendations
Discussion & Short-Listing Determination
2
1
Description of Project
Public-private partnership between FDOT and a
concessionaire to:
Design, build, finance, operate, and maintain the I-4
Ultimate Project through a Concession Agreement.
Reconstruct and widen the I-4 to accommodate 3 general
use lanes, auxiliary lanes, and 2 managed lanes in each
direction.
Reconstruct or build 19 interchanges and replace or
construct over 100 bridges.
3
Composition of Proposer Teams
4wardPartners
Equity Members
VINCI Concessions S.A.S. (42.5%)
Meridiam Infrastructure I-4 Ultimate, LLC (42.5%)
Walsh Investors, LLC (15%)
Lead Contractor
Archer Western-Hubbard-de Moya Joint Venture (Archer
Western Contractors, LLC; Hubbard Construction Company;
and The de Moya Group, Inc.)
Lead Engineering Firm
AECOM Technical Services, Inc.
Lead Operations and Maintenance Firm
4wardPartners (VINCI Concessions S.A.S.; Meridiam
Infrastructure I-4 Ultimate, LLC; and Walsh Investors, LLC)
4
2
Composition of Proposer Teams
I-4 Development Partners LLC
Equity Members
Macquarie Capital Group Limited (40%)
OHL Concesiones S.A. (40%)
FCC Construccion S.A. (20%)
Lead Contractor
A team comprised of Obrascon Huarte Lain, S.A.; Community
Asphalt Corp.; and FCC Construccion, S.A.
Lead Engineering Firm
HNTB Corporation
Lead Operations and Maintenance Firm
A team comprised of Macquarie Capital Group Limited; OHL
Concesiones S.A.; and FCC Construccion S.A.
5
Composition of Proposer Teams
Ultimate Mobility Partners
Equity Members
InfraRed Capital Partners Limited (70%)
Fluor Enterprises, Inc. (15%)
Kiewit Infrastructure South Co. (15%)
Lead Contractor
Ultimate Mobility Constructors (Fluor Enterprises, Inc. and
Kiewit Infrastructure South Co.)
Lead Engineering Firm
Parsons/Atkins (a JV of Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. and
Atkins North America, Inc.)
Lead Operations and Maintenance Firm
Ultimate Mobility Operators (Fluor Enterprises, Inc. and DBi
Services, LLC)
6
3
Composition of Proposer Teams
I-4 Mobility Partners
Equity Members
Skanska Infrastructure Development Inc. (50%)
John Laing Investments Limited (50%)
Lead Contractor
Skanska-Granite-Lane Joint Venture (Skanska USA Civil
Southeast Inc.; Granite Construction Company; and The Lane
Construction Corporation)
Lead Engineering Firm
HDR/Jacobs Design Joint Venture (HDR Engineering, Inc. and
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.)
Lead Operations and Maintenance Firm
Infrastructure Corporation of America
7
Composition of Proposer Teams
I-4 Ultimate Mobility Partners
Equity Members
Cintra Infraestructuras, S.A. (100%)
Lead Contractor
A design-build JV of Ferrovial Agroman, S.A. and MCM
Lead Engineering Firm
A JV of The Louis Berger Group, Inc. and Lockwood,
Andrews & Newnam, Inc.
Lead Operations and Maintenance Firm
Cintra Infraestructuras, S.A.
8
4
Composition of Proposer Teams
I-4 Ultimate Expressway Partners
Equity Members
Odebrecht Roadway Investments Corporation (25%)
Samsung E&C America, Inc. (25%)
Bilfinger Project Investments International Holding GmbH (25%)
Balfour Beatty Investments, Inc. (25%)
Lead Contractor
A team comprised of Odebrecht Construction, Inc.; Zachry
Construction Corporation; and Samsung E&C America, Inc.
Lead Engineering Firm
Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc.
Lead Operations and Maintenance Firm
Transfield Services Infrastructure, Inc.
9
Composition of Proposer Teams
4ward Express ProposerCo, LLC
Equity Members
ACS Infrastructure Development, Inc. (40%)
Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America (40%)
Shikun & Binui Ltd. (20%)
Lead Contractor
A construction JV of Dragados USA, Inc. and Shikun & Binui Ltd.
Lead Engineering Firm
Lochner MMM Group, LLC (JV of H.W. Lochner, Inc. and MMM
Group Limited)
Lead Operations and Maintenance Firm
Roy Jorgensen Associates, Inc.
10
5
Procurement Schedule
Two Phase Procurement
Request for Qualifications
Released - March 8, 2013
Statements of Qualifications Received - April 19, 2013
Short-list Proposers Based on SOQs - May 21, 2013
Request for Proposals
Release Final RFP – September 2013
Proposals Due – January 2014
Evaluation of Proposals – January ~ March 2014
Selection of a “Best Value Proposal” – March 2014
Award and Execution - June 2014
11
Summary of Procurement Process
SOQ Evaluation Process – Part I
Leon Corbett sets the weighting of financial evaluation criteria
Frank O’Dea sets the weighting of technical evaluation criteria
and the numerical equivalents for the adjectival scores
Procurement office receives and logs SOQs
Financial, Technical and Pass/Fail Expert Panels develop
consensus comments following the RFQ evaluation criteria
Expert Panel members meet with Scoring Committee members
individually to present their analysis
12
6
Summary of Procurement Process
SOQ Evaluation Process – Part II
Scoring Committee members score SOQs and perform
pass/fail determination on an individual basis
Scoring Committee members submit scores and pass/fail
recommendations to Procurement office
Public Meeting
Procurement office converts adjectival scores using
predetermined weightings and numerical equivalents
Project Selection Committee makes short-listing decision (or
elects to defer until another public meeting)
13
Clarification of Expert Panels’
Consensus Comments
14
7
Presentation of Pass/Fail Recommendations
Financial
Technical
Administrative
15
Presentation of Pass/Fail Recommendations
Summary of SOQ Pass/Fail Recommendations
Proposer Teams
Technical Pass/fail:
Technical Scoring
Committee
Financial Pass/Fail:
Financial Scoring
Committee
Administrative Pass/Fail:
Administrative Scoring
Committee
Overall
Pass/Fail
4wardPartners
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
I-4 Development Partners LLC
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Ultimate Mobility Partners
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
I-4 Mobility Partners
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
I-4 Ultimate Mobility Partners
Fail*
Fail
Pass
Fail
I-4 Ultimate Expressway Partners
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
4ward Express ProposerCo, LLC
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
* 2 Scorers failed, 1 Scorer passed
16
8
Summary of SOQ
Recommendations
17
Opening of Weightings and
Numerical Equivalents
18
9
Summary of SOQ Scoring Recommendations
To be inserted
During Public Meeting
19
Proposer Ranking Recommendations
To be inserted
During Public Meeting
20
10
Project Selection Committee
Discussion
&
Short-Listing Determination
21
11
19
Summary of SOQ Scoring Recommendations
Possible Max.
Score
4wardPartners
I-4
Development
Partners LLC
Overall Recommended SOQ Score (100 Max. Points)
100.00
71.49
75.26
Ultimate
Mobility
Partners
I-4 Mobility
Partners
I-4 Ultimate
Expressway
Partners
4ward Express
ProposerCo,
LLC
66.08
76.39
64.23
63.09
34.73
24.20
26.67
Component 1: Technical Qualifications and Capability (40 Maximum Points)
40.00
34.33
32.00
36.73
Component 2: Statement of Technical and Subcontracting Approach (10 Maximum Points)
10.00
8.20
7.93
6.93
Component 3: Financial Qualifications and Capacity (45 Maximum Points)
45.00
25.54
31.63
20.50
Component 4: Statement of Financial Approach (5 Maximum Points)
5.00
3.42
3.70
1.92
5.90
6.87
6.80
33.29
30.67
26.38
2.47
2.50
3.25
19
1
Proposer Ranking Recommendations
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
Overall Ranking (Max 100 Points)
Team
I-4 Mobility Partners
I-4 Development Partners LLC
4wardPartners
Ultimate Mobility Partners
I-4 Ultimate Expressway Partners
4ward Express ProposerCo, LLC
Score
76.39
75.26
71.49
66.08
64.23
63.09
20
Project Selection Committee
Discussion
&
Short-Listing Determination
21
2